I've heard there might be patches that are not accepted into Glycerin.
I'd like to see few things happen:
1) In case George has looked at patches but doesn't accept for whatever
reason (and that's his right) it would be nice if the reasons are made
explicit. If some more work is needed to get the patch accepted, saying
that would be most important. If there're ideological or other reasons
making those public would provide sense of direction for the rest of devs.
I propose all Patch talk is kept in this same Nitro mailing list but
message subjects would be prefixed with "PATCH:". In time, I hope, the
patch traffic will grow to annoying level and dedicated mailing list
should be spawned.
I hope no message containing a Patch won't go unanswered. Simple
"committed" or "won't make into glue per
http://www.nitrohq.com/view/ArchitecturalGuidelines" shouldn't be too
much. Discussions might emerge for accepted and not-accepted patches.
2) All the patches would be public. Those shouldn't be sent only to
George but for example to aforementioned public mailing list or they
could be placed into separate directory at nitrohq for rest of Devs to
fetch and work upon.
One could go forward with public patches and more maintainers might show
up naturally. In case George is busy sometime another maintainer could
prepare glycerin "upgrade" bundle by accepting dozens of patches and
testing those. George would then have an easy job to put that one bigger
bundle in official glycerin.
I guess this kind "parallel development" is one of the great ideas Darcs
should enable.
----
I have no standing patches, I guess, so these points don't touch me
personally, but I could imagine any dev could get frustrated if sending
patches feels like throwing them into (mostly friendly) black hole.
- Aleksi